Last Modified: Saturday, January 19, 2013 at 11:30 p.m.

Jindal says he wants to eliminate the state's personal income and corporate taxes and replace them with higher sales taxes. Aside from that, he and his administration have offered no details. And some media reports suggest he won't divulge the full plan until just before the state Legislature convenes April 8.

Since there isn't one yet, it's too early to take a position for or against the plan. But the concept itself offers plenty of thought-provoking implications that merit close scrutiny from every single one of us who live and work in Louisiana.

Here are a few random thoughts based on what I have read and heard in interviews with Jindal administration officials and reports from media, government-watchdog and special-interest groups.

-- Jindal's broad goal — to make the state's tax structure more conducive to growing and attracting businesses — sounds logical. If it works, more business will generate more money for everybody — companies, employees, state and local governments.

-- Already, this is shaping up as another round of class warfare. Critics suggest that raising sales taxes is a greater burden on the poor and middle class. The rich may pay more raw dollars in sales taxes, but the poor pay a greater percentage of their incomes. At best, the issue will get a thorough and civil discussion among lawmakers, special interests and Louisiana voters and taxpayers based on facts. At worst, it will descend into the same partisan feuding and us-vs.-them name-calling that has paralyzed Congress and poisoned national debate about almost any meaningful issue.

-- The Tax Foundation, a Washington, D.C., think tank that describes itself as nonpartisan, calls Jindal's plan “a step in the right direction.” In a blog post last week, foundation analyst Scott Drenkard said Jindal's plan could thrust Louisiana from 32nd to 4th on the group's annual state business-climate ranking, the biggest jump in the index's history. “Corporate and individual income taxes are generally considered the most destructive taxes to economic growth, and both have a great deal of complexity and compliance costs associated with them,” Drenkard wrote. “The expansion of the sales tax base to services is probably one of the more groundbreaking components of this plan, and I'm hopeful that lawmakers in Louisiana will do it right.”

-- The Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana, a trustworthy government-watchdog group, issued a lengthy report last week that expresses reservations. Among its concerns, the group questions whether an overreliance on sales taxes will make the state's tax structure too unstable. I remember how state and local sales taxes took a nosedive during the late-1980s oil bust, resulting in massive government layoffs and severely reduced public services. In contrast, the Jindal administration cites historical data and studies that show sales taxes are more stable — not less — than income taxes, which also rise and fall with a state's economic fortunes. I call this debate a draw — at least so far.

-- Skeptics, including the well-respected LSU economics professor James Richardson, question whether Jindal can or should raise sales or any other taxes high enough to account for the loss of almost $3 billion a year in personal-income and corporate taxes. Some media reports suggest that Jindal plans to raise the state's sales tax from its current 4 cents on the dollar to 7 cents. Tack on the sales taxes levied by local agencies, and we're talking about paying well over 10 cents on every dollar we spend on items subject to the tax.

Jindal's plan could make it harder for local boards to levy new sales taxes to pay for public services such as schools, policing and flood protection, regardless of how worthy the cause.

Jindal says his plan will be “revenue-neutral.” That means the overall amount of taxes the state collects — in aggregate — will be the same after the change as it is now. But that doesn't mean it will be “revenue-neutral” for me or you or any other taxpayer. There will be winners and losers; we'll find out who they are as details emerge.

Parish councils, school boards and levee districts might try to sell any new sales tax by reminding voters they aren't paying income taxes anymore. But people paying 13 or 14 cents on the dollar in sales taxes might not buy that “revenue-neutral” stuff. They'll ignore the argument about not paying income taxes anymore and say things like, “Raise sales taxes again? You have got to be joking.”

I'll have a lot more to say about this, but for now, here's my advice: Keep an eye on your wallet.

Courier and Daily Comet Executive Editor Keith Magill can be reached at 857-2201 or keith.magill@houmatoday.com.

<p>Nobody knows the details yet, but that hasn't stopped politicians, pundits, economists and watchdog groups from weighing in on Gov. Bobby Jindal's tax-reform plan.</p><p>Add me to the fray.</p><p>Jindal says he wants to eliminate the state's personal income and corporate taxes and replace them with higher sales taxes. Aside from that, he and his administration have offered no details. And some media reports suggest he won't divulge the full plan until just before the state Legislature convenes April 8.</p><p>Since there isn't one yet, it's too early to take a position for or against the plan. But the concept itself offers plenty of thought-provoking implications that merit close scrutiny from every single one of us who live and work in Louisiana.</p><p>Here are a few random thoughts based on what I have read and heard in interviews with Jindal administration officials and reports from media, government-watchdog and special-interest groups.</p><p>-- Jindal's broad goal — to make the state's tax structure more conducive to growing and attracting businesses — sounds logical. If it works, more business will generate more money for everybody — companies, employees, state and local governments.</p><p>-- Already, this is shaping up as another round of class warfare. Critics suggest that raising sales taxes is a greater burden on the poor and middle class. The rich may pay more raw dollars in sales taxes, but the poor pay a greater percentage of their incomes. At best, the issue will get a thorough and civil discussion among lawmakers, special interests and Louisiana voters and taxpayers based on facts. At worst, it will descend into the same partisan feuding and us-vs.-them name-calling that has paralyzed Congress and poisoned national debate about almost any meaningful issue.</p><p>-- The Tax Foundation, a Washington, D.C., think tank that describes itself as nonpartisan, calls Jindal's plan “a step in the right direction.” In a blog post last week, foundation analyst Scott Drenkard said Jindal's plan could thrust Louisiana from 32nd to 4th on the group's annual state business-climate ranking, the biggest jump in the index's history. “Corporate and individual income taxes are generally considered the most destructive taxes to economic growth, and both have a great deal of complexity and compliance costs associated with them,” Drenkard wrote. “The expansion of the sales tax base to services is probably one of the more groundbreaking components of this plan, and I'm hopeful that lawmakers in Louisiana will do it right.”</p><p>-- The Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana, a trustworthy government-watchdog group, issued a lengthy report last week that expresses reservations. Among its concerns, the group questions whether an overreliance on sales taxes will make the state's tax structure too unstable. I remember how state and local sales taxes took a nosedive during the late-1980s oil bust, resulting in massive government layoffs and severely reduced public services. In contrast, the Jindal administration cites historical data and studies that show sales taxes are more stable — not less — than income taxes, which also rise and fall with a state's economic fortunes. I call this debate a draw — at least so far.</p><p>-- Skeptics, including the well-respected LSU economics professor James Richardson, question whether Jindal can or should raise sales or any other taxes high enough to account for the loss of almost $3 billion a year in personal-income and corporate taxes. Some media reports suggest that Jindal plans to raise the state's sales tax from its current 4 cents on the dollar to 7 cents. Tack on the sales taxes levied by local agencies, and we're talking about paying well over 10 cents on every dollar we spend on items subject to the tax.</p><p>Jindal's plan could make it harder for local boards to levy new sales taxes to pay for public services such as schools, policing and flood protection, regardless of how worthy the cause.</p><p>Jindal says his plan will be “revenue-neutral.” That means the overall amount of taxes the state collects — in aggregate — will be the same after the change as it is now. But that doesn't mean it will be “revenue-neutral” for me or you or any other taxpayer. There will be winners and losers; we'll find out who they are as details emerge.</p><p>Parish councils, school boards and levee districts might try to sell any new sales tax by reminding voters they aren't paying income taxes anymore. But people paying 13 or 14 cents on the dollar in sales taxes might not buy that “revenue-neutral” stuff. They'll ignore the argument about not paying income taxes anymore and say things like, “Raise sales taxes again? You have got to be joking.”</p><p>I'll have a lot more to say about this, but for now, here's my advice: Keep an eye on your wallet.</p><p><i>Courier and Daily Comet Executive Editor Keith Magill can be reached at 857-2201 or keith.magill@houmatoday.com.</i></p>